Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

More sophisticated label name mechanism #3

Open
bsless opened this issue Sep 4, 2021 · 1 comment
Open

More sophisticated label name mechanism #3

bsless opened this issue Sep 4, 2021 · 1 comment

Comments

@bsless
Copy link

bsless commented Sep 4, 2021

Thank you for this script, it surely makes life easier :)
When used with several files, displaying the correct label is a bit of a heuristic process, though. I could rename my files, but generally, perhaps it could be improved
What do you think about the following heuristic for labeling:

  • split file names on a set of strings such as ., _, -
  • count the occurrences in each bin in the split (we care about 1 vs. many)
  • many bins are selected for label names
  • 1 bins (common for all) can become the title

I wouldn't mind PRing this

Thanks

@BrunoBonacci
Copy link
Owner

Hi,

Apologies for replying to this 1.5y later. My bad!

Each file represents a latency curve to plot. Plotting move curves allows for comparing different variants. I think that giving the self-explanatory name to the file which describes a given variant tested is not only a good thing but in many cases necessary to make sense of the data (especially when looking back at test results some time later).
For this reason, I thought using the filename would have been the easiest way to get a meaningful label with the least amount of effort. Otherwise, you need some way to associate a label (text) to each filename.

Looking at the scheme you proposed, I'm not sure I fully understand we would achieve such a result.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants